Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.

Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

I Think We're a[Clone] Now

Japanese scientists have produced clones of mice that have been dead and frozen for 16 years -- a feat that could lead researchers to one day resurrect long-extinct species, such as the mammoth.

Dolly was cloned using cells from live animals. Now scientists believe they can resurrect extinct species.

Until now, scientists have only been able to produce clones using cells from live animals. This is how researchers created Dolly the Sheep, the first mammal to be cloned from an adult animal.

Researchers had thought that frozen cells were unusable because ice crystals would have damaged the DNA. That belief would rule out the possibility of resurrecting extinct animals from their frozen remains.

But the latest research -- published in the journal, Proceedings for the National Academy of Sciences -- shows that scientists may have overcome the obstacle.

It's all over for us. Ian Malcolm was right. First it's mice, then it's mammoths, then it's dinosaurs. Worldwide Jurassic Park.

WELP.

If we're heading down that road ... wait, wait. First, should we head down that road? You get into some tricky ethical dilemnas that way apparently. At least that's what sci-fi has taught me. Me, I say go for it. I want to see an actual woolly mammoth or sabertooth tiger or (oh my oh my please) Tyrannosaurus Rex. What do you want to see, if anything?

But what about people? Do we leave that untouched? It's funny to me that the standard discussion is whether it's ethical to clone humans. What I'm wondering is if it would be ethical to clone Neanderthals or the Peking Man?

This isn't too well fleshed out and it's Election Day, so maybe it won't get a whole lot of attention, but maybe this will spur some discussion or yelling.

"I'm a mad god. The Mad God, actually. It's a family title. Gets passed down from me to myself every few thousand years."

Armored Gorilla on November 2008

0

Posts

This uh, this isn't the breakthrough you think it is. It is a massive thing to bring back a species which has no living reproductive system - mice can be implanted into mice easily - the development environment is the same.

There is no such potential for say, dinosaurs. The woolly mammoth, well, maybe elephants but that would still be, I imagine, asking a lot.

This uh, this isn't the breakthrough you think it is. It is a massive thing to bring back a species which has no living reproductive system - mice can be implanted into mice easily - the development environment is the same.

There is no such potential for say, dinosaurs. The woolly mammoth, well, maybe elephants but that would still be, I imagine, asking a lot.

mammoth = aliens?

get to six months and splash! the elephant explodes

Morninglord on November 2008

(PSN: Morninglord) (Steam: Morninglord) (WiiU: Morninglord22) I like to record and toss up a lot of random gaming videos here.

Cloning any sentient being at this point is essentially immoral - there's no reasonable expectation that the result will turn out well, so it's fairly likely that there would be developmental abnormalities. That covers everything from humans to chimps (since they hold honorary human status and science on them is subject to pretty tight restrictions).

I think cloning early evolutionary junctures of mankind opens up a different can of worms as well - that is - is it right to deliberately create a human with diminished brain capacity? I'm not so sure I'd be happy about that - I mean, how would such a person (for indeed they would be a person in their own right) - deal with society and their own existence?

Cloning any sentient being at this point is essentially immoral - there's no reasonable expectation that the result will turn out well, so it's fairly likely that there would be developmental abnormalities. That covers everything from humans to chimps (since they hold honorary human status and science on them is subject to pretty tight restrictions).

I think cloning early evolutionary junctures of mankind opens up a different can of worms as well - that is - is it right to deliberately create a human with diminished brain capacity? I'm not so sure I'd be happy about that - I mean, how would such a person (for indeed they would be a person in their own right) - deal with society and their own existence?

I'm with you on that. And how do you treat them? You can't really keep them sheltered away like an animal for study.

Armored Gorilla on November 2008

"I'm a mad god. The Mad God, actually. It's a family title. Gets passed down from me to myself every few thousand years."

Cloning any sentient being at this point is essentially immoral - there's no reasonable expectation that the result will turn out well, so it's fairly likely that there would be developmental abnormalities. That covers everything from humans to chimps (since they hold honorary human status and science on them is subject to pretty tight restrictions).

I think cloning early evolutionary junctures of mankind opens up a different can of worms as well - that is - is it right to deliberately create a human with diminished brain capacity? I'm not so sure I'd be happy about that - I mean, how would such a person (for indeed they would be a person in their own right) - deal with society and their own existence?

I was under the impression they'd been added to our particular subset of the homo genus. At any rate I do know they are considered rather more importantly human and you need pretty special permits to do the science on them.

I was under the impression they'd been added to our particular subset of the homo genus. At any rate I do know they are considered rather more importantly human and you need pretty special permits to do the science on them.

I can't for the life of me find an article about it though.

Yeah, I was just curious. It's been a couple of years since I've had to deal with the NHMRC. As far as I know, all non-human primates are regarded as particularly sensitive, and there are very strict rules involved, but no great ape is given any more weight than the others ethically.

In terms of research ethics there is a huge and fundamental difference in the founding principles that guide human and animal research. Placing any non human species under the HREC umbrella would be a huge move that'd change everything that currently protects animal research. Getting back on topic, viable human clones could conceivably have a similar effect.

The Daily Mail is worried about the technology being used to make gullible people believe they can be completely restored after they die, with memories and everything intact.

I'd be offended if I didn't know some people that might work on.

Well, we need to store your memories before you die so we can put them into your youthful clone. Just give me all your money and step into this hear machine, you'll feel some pressure and a little pinch, nothing to be worried about.